Arthroscopy versus arthrocentesis and versus conservative treatments for temporomandibular joint disorders: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.
Systematic Review
The aim of this systematic review was to assess the efficacy of arthroscopy compared to arthrocentesis and to conservative treatments for temporomandibular joint disorders. Thirteen controlled studies on various patient outcomes were included after a systematic search in seven electronic databases. Meta-analyses were conducted separately for arthroscopic surgery (AS) and arthroscopic lysis and lavage (ALL), and short-term (<6 months), intermediate-term (6 months to 5 years), and long-term (≥5 years) follow-up periods were considered. No significant differences in pain reduction and complication rates were found between AS or ALL and arthrocentesis. Regarding improvement in maximum mouth opening (MMO), both AS at intermediate-term and ALL at short-term follow-up were equally efficient when compared to arthrocentesis. However, at intermediate-term follow-up, ALL was superior to arthrocentesis for MMO improvement (mean difference 4.9 mm, 95% confidence interval 2.7-7.1 mm). Trial sequential analysis supported the conclusion of the meta-analysis for MMO improvement for ALL versus arthrocentesis studies at intermediate-term follow-up, but not for the other meta-analyses. Insufficient evidence exists to draw conclusions regarding other patient outcomes or about comparisons between arthroscopy and conservative treatments. Due to the low quality of the primary studies, further research is warranted before final conclusions can be drawn regarding the management of temporomandibular joint disorders.
